Chicago, R. I. & G. Ry. Co. v. Trout
This text of 208 S.W. 656 (Chicago, R. I. & G. Ry. Co. v. Trout) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Texas Commission of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
We have carefully considered the motion for rehearing in this cause and the very lengthy argument of counsel for defendant in error in support thereof.
In our original investigation, we carefully considered every contention of the parties, and the motion presents no new view of the facts or law. The petition of plaintiff was offered and admitted in evidence for the purpose of showing only what the pleadings were originally.
The special charge requested by defendant Railway Company followed a refused peremptory charge asked by them, and in view of the record did not invite error.
The motion should be overruled.
The recommendation of the Commission of Appeals on this motion is adopted. The motion is accordingly overruled.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
208 S.W. 656, 1919 Tex. App. LEXIS 129, 1919 WL 42, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/chicago-r-i-g-ry-co-v-trout-texcommnapp-1919.